Next Article in Journal
Public Participation and the Effect of Environmental Governance in China: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Law Reinforcement, Production Pattern and Enterprise Environmental Performance: Evidence from Environmental Courts in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 5
10.3390/su15054439
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Analytical Framework for Formulating Conservation and Development Measures for Important Agricultural Heritage Systems

by
Wenjun Jiao
1,
Zhounan Yu
1,
Yehong Sun
2,* and
Yang Liu
1
1
Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
2
Tourism College, Beijing Union University, Beijing 100101, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(5), 4439; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054439
Submission received: 25 December 2022 / Revised: 15 February 2023 / Accepted: 20 February 2023 / Published: 2 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Management)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS) are complex adaptive systems that are multidimensional and exhibit strategic values of sustainability. In the context of modernization, IAHS have been increasingly challenged. Thus, the heritage sites must explore dynamic conservation approaches and formulate adaptive management strategies. However, few studies have provided either theoretical methods or practical cases as support. In this study, we put forward an analytical framework for IAHS conservation and development measure formulation based on the Driver –Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) model and applied it to the Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System (SDSTS). With this framework, we analyzed the supportive mechanisms for the stable state of the SDSTS, diagnosed the threats and challenges it faces, and then formulated 34 conservation and development measures from six aspects, namely management mechanism construction, ecological conservation, cultural inheritance, green and organic product development, sustainable tourism development, and capacity building. It is demonstrated that the DPSIR-based analytical framework can provide both theoretical and technical support for the formulation of IAHS conservation and development measures, thus having the potential to become a general tool for the dynamic conservation and sustainable development of IAHS.

1. Introduction

Sustainable development is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [1]. This concept encompasses the economic, social, and environmental dimensions, both locally and globally, to achieve the immediate objectives without jeopardizing future ones. Nowadays, humanity is faced with a major challenge to achieve sustainable agriculture that provides sufficient food and ecosystem services for both present and future generations. Modern agricultural systems, which are based on high technological inputs and oriented to maximizing profits, have been criticized as often being detrimental and nonviable when considered from social and ecological perspectives [2]. The increased productivity brought by modern agricultural systems usually comes at the cost of environmental pollution, pesticide resistance, and rising economic costs due to the necessary heavy application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides [3,4]. This realization has led experts to reflect on modern agricultural systems and look for help from traditional ones that have been developed and maintained by local farmers for centuries with ingenious practices that often result in both community food security and the conservation of ecosystem services [5,6].
In 2002, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) started a global partnership initiative on the conservation and adaptive management of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS). It aims to establish a protection system for GIAHS and their landscape, biodiversity, knowledge, and culture, and be recognized and protected worldwide, making it the basis of sustainable management [7,8]. In 2005, five traditional agricultural systems located in six countries, including the Qingtian Rice–Fish Culture System in China, were designated as the first pilot systems. In 2015, the GIAHS initiative was endorsed as a corporate program at the FAO 39th Session, ushering in a whole new stage for the conservation and development of GIAHS. As of December 2022, the number of GIAHS designations in the world reached 72, distributed in 23 countries; among them, 19 GIAHS are located in China, accounting for about one quarter of the total. At the national level, China, South Korea, and Japan successively carried out the exploration and conservation of Nationally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (NIAHS). The total number of China-NIAHS came to 138 by the end of 2022, distributed in 25 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions in the mainland of China.
GIAHS and NIAHS are referred to as Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS) which are complex adaptive systems. They are complex in that they are multidimensional and composed of ecological subsystems and social subsystems that are inter-dependent in various ways and affect each other to some degree [9,10]. They are also described as living systems that are dynamic and adaptive, exhibiting the strategic values of multi-functionality and sustainability [11]. These strategic values of IAHS are specifically expressed as multiple values of economy and livelihood, ecology and environment, as well as society and culture [12], which are of great significance for ensuring food safety [13,14], protecting biodiversity [15,16], coping with climate change [17,18], protecting cultural diversity [19,20], and other major problems faced by mankind. Therefore, IAHS have been recognized as having the potential to contribute greatly to the FAO Strategic Objectives (SO), to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Articles [21,22].
However, with modernity bringing technological change, new social values, and transformative economic development, IAHS have been increasingly challenged. Traditional agricultural production is characterized by a high labor intensity and low mechanization, therefore having low comparative benefits. As a result, many farmers in the heritage sites, especially young farmers, must give up traditional agricultural production and go to towns and cities as migrant workers. Influenced by a massive labor outflow, the phenomenon of farmland abandonment has occurred to different degrees in the heritage sites [11,16]. Further, driven by market demands and economic development, traditional agricultural production modes in many heritage sites have changed significantly or are no longer used [23,24]. The massive labor outflow has also imposed a significant impact on the inheritance of traditional knowledge, technologies, and related cultures that are confronted with the risk of being lost in the heritage sites [25,26,27]. After enduring the depredations of droughts, famines, plagues, floods, and wars for centuries, IAHS are now facing great threats and challenges brought by modernization [11]. In the context of modernization, therefore, how to formulate effective conservation and development measures for IAHS has become a critical question. However, few studies provide theoretical methods and practical cases as support for the formulation of IAHS conservation and development measures.
To fill this gap, we put forward an analytical framework for formulating IAHS conservation and development measures based on the Driver–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) model in this study and apply this framework to the Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System (SDSTS), a China-NIAHS designated in 2014 as well as a GIAHS designated in 2022. In Section 2, we make a detailed description of the analytical framework based on the DPSIR model and then introduce the study area and data collection. In Section 3, we first analyze the supportive mechanisms for the stable state of the SDSTS, then we make a systematic diagnosis of the pressures and their negative impacts, and finally we formulate conservation and development measures to respond to these pressures. In Section 4, we discuss the importance of safeguard measures for implementing conservation and development measures and point out the potentials and limitations of the DPSIR-based analytical framework. It is demonstrated that the DPSIR-based analytical framework can provide both theoretical and technical support for the formulation of IAHS conservation and development measures, therefore contributing to the dynamic conservation and sustainable development of IAHS.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The DPSIR-Based Analytical Framework

The Driver–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) conceptual model was first proposed by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) when revising the conceptual models of Driving Force–State–Response (DSR) and Pressure–State–Response (PSR) [28]. It is a problem structuring approach that allows the cause–effect relationships between anthropogenic activities and their environmental and socio-economic impacts to be explored and described in a sequential manner, while also accounting for feedback loops [29,30,31]. In the DPSIR model, natural and human drivers exert pressure on the ecosystem, leading to state changes and a series of impacts that may require a policy response, and the human response can simultaneously produce feedback to the drivers, reduce pressures, improve states, and reduce negative impacts, thus creating a feedback loop of driver, pressure, state, impact, and response [32].
The DPSIR model provides an overall mechanism for analyzing environmental problems with regards to sustainable development [28]. It has been widely used in environmental management to link ecological and socio-economic factors [33,34,35] for decision making on environmental issues [31]. It has been applied in the assessment of the ecological effect of environmental management [28,36], the development of biodiversity indicators [37], the analysis of urban land expansion and land use policy [38,39], the assessment of ecosystem health and resilience [32,40], the evaluation of ecosystem services and their anthropogenic influential factors [35,41,42], the generation of environmental policies and governance processes [43,44,45], etc.
In the previous study, we reviewed a great amount of IAHS conservation literature in the past two decades and found that IAHS and their conservation presented a logical relationship of driver, pressure, state, impact, and response [46]. This logical relationship can be summarized into the following three aspects. Firstly, the loss of the labor force and the abandonment of land have caused a great pressure on the conservation of IAHS. A series of problems such as hollowing-out villages, land abandonment, and the loss of traditional knowledge and cultures have emerged with the loss of the labor force. Traditional production modes are also changing, such as the loss of endemic varieties and the widespread use of chemicals. Secondly, the state of IAHS will inevitably be changed in the structures, functions, and values. Despite the internal mechanisms for socio-ecological sustainability, the external pressures will eventually lead to changes in the structures and functions of IAHS at different scales, such as the species, population, ecosystem, and landscape. Thus, the sustainability of IAHS and their social, ecological, and economic values will be inevitably affected. Thirdly, conservation approaches and measures must be established to reduce the pressures and improve the state of IAHS. As complex adaptive systems, IAHS will reach a new state of equilibrium through a period of adaptation under the interaction of pressures and responses. IAHS under the new state will show changes in functions and values, and these changes will form feedback on the effectiveness of conservation approaches and measures, thus helping to adjust and improve IAHS conservation and development.
Following such a logical relationship, we think the DPSIR model is suitable for IAHS conservation research and put forward an analytical framework for formulating IAHS conservation and development measures based on this model (Figure 1). In this DPSIR-based analytical framework, the five categories are defined as follows.
  • Drivers (D) correspond to socio-economic and eco-environmental processes that influence IAHS. Socio-economic drivers mainly refer to anthropogenic causes with regard to socio-economic development, such as modernization, urbanization, and industrialization. Eco-environmental drivers are normally considered to be ecological and environmental processes without human control, such as climate change and geological disasters.
  • Pressures (P) are the ways in which these drivers are actually expressed, and the specific ways that IAHS and their components are perturbed. For the threats and challenges brought by modernization, the pressures are expressed, for example, in the young labor loss, land use change, and production mode change.
  • State (S) refers to the state and changing trend of different subsystems of IAHS that result from at least one of the pressures and end up with changes in the social or ecological sustainability of IAHS.
  • Impacts (I) are changes in IAHS functions and values that follow on from the state changes, which include all relevant functions and values in livelihood and economy, ecology and environment, and society and culture that constitute the social and ecological aspects of IAHS.
  • Responses (R) represent relevant conservation and development measures that feedback to the drivers, pressures, state changes, and impacts. These include dynamic conservation approaches such as environmentally friendly production and sustainable tourism, and effective safeguarding measures such as multi-stakeholder processes, payment for ecosystem services, and monitoring and evaluation.
The DPSIR-based analytical framework can fully reflect the characteristics of IAHS and their conservation, and outline the path for formulating IAHS conservation and development measures. The main principles for implementing the framework include that, firstly, we should comprehensively sort out the mechanisms supporting the stable state of IAHS to ensure that the conservation and development measures can reinforce these mechanisms and thus improve the state of IAHS and promote the positive impacts; secondly, we should systematically analyze the threats and challenges facing IAHS to ensure that conservation and development measures can effectively respond to these pressures and thus reduce the negative impacts.
In this study, we apply the DPSIR-based analytical framework to the Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System (SDSTS) with a three-step process. We start with a comprehensive analysis of the ecological, social, and economic mechanisms that support the stable state and the sustainability of the SDSTS. Then, we make a systematic diagnosis of the pressures (i.e., threats and challenges) from the main drivers of modernization, as well as the negative impacts they have brought for the SDSTS. Finally, we formulate conservation and development measures for the SDSTS to improve the state of the SDSTS and to respond to these pressures.

2.2. Study Area

The Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System (SDSTS) is located in She County, Handan City, Hebei Province, China. She County is situated in the eastern foothills of Mount Taihang and at the junction of the Shanxi, Hebei, and Henan provinces. It is bordered between 36°17′ and 36°55′ north latitude and 113°26′ and 114°00′ east longitude. The heritage site is demarcated within the towns of Jingdian, Gengle, and Guanfang on the southeastern end of She County where the largest and most representative stone terraced fields are distributed (Figure 2). The heritage site is comprised of 15 administrative villages from Jingdian Town, 15 administrative villages from Gengle Town, and all 16 administrative villages of Guanfang Town, making for a total of 46 administrative villages. She County covers an area of 1509 km2. The total area of the heritage site is 204.35 km2, of which the area of stone terraced fields is 27.68 km2.
She County is a temperate continental monsoon climate with cold and dry winters, hot and rainy summers, and a dry and rainless spring and autumn. The annual average temperature of the heritage site is 12.5 °C, the annual sunshine hours are 2478.7 h, and the annual average precipitation is 540.5 mm of which 70% is concentrated in the summer. Therefore, there is a shortfall in local water resources on one hand, while floods are common from July to August on the other. She County is also located in a transitional zone between the Loess Plateau and the North China Plain. The terrain slopes from the northwest to the southeast. The elevation of the heritage site is between 350 and 1150 m above sea level and the maximum slope is up to 66 degrees. The landforms of the heritage site are mainly mountains, including high mountains, low mountains, and valleys. The nature environment of the heritage site can be characterized as “high mountains and steep slopes, more mountainous than flat land, more rock than soil, arid, and dry”. In order to reduce the loss of soil and water and gain as much arable land as possible, the locals constructed large numbers of stone terraced fields along the steep mountains (Figure 3). It can be traced back to the twenty-seventh year of the Zhiyuan Age (1290) of the Yuan Dynasty or earlier.
The total population of She County was 426,320 in 2017, dominated by the Han nationality which accounts for more than 99% of the total population. There are also 22 ethnic minorities such as Mongolian, Zhuang, Tibetan, and Yi, accounting for less than 1%. The registered population of the heritage site was 39,238 in 2017, and the resident population was 27,797. The main source of livelihood in the heritage site comes from migrant workers. In 2017, the income from migrant workers accounted for about 58% of the total income, while that from the production of agricultural products was about 40%, and that from the processing and sales of agricultural products, tourism services, and other sources accounted for about 2%.
The SDSTS is a rain-fed agricultural system in the mountains, developed by the local ancestors through adapting to and transforming the harsh natural environment and inherited from generation to generation. Its history is no later than the 27th year of Zhiyuan (a reign title of Kublai Khan) of the Yuan Dynasty (1290). The stone terraced fields in the heritage site can be characterized as “orderly, crowded, grand”, and are an outstanding representative of the terraces in Mount Taihang in particular and northern China in general, which has witnessed the development history and achievement of dryland farming in northern China. In 2014, the SDSTS was designated as a China-NIAHS by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA). In 2022, the SDSTS was designated as a GIAHS by FAO.

2.3. Data Collection

We went to the heritage site to carry out field surveys in January, May, and August, respectively, in 2018. The data for this study were collected through a questionnaire survey of locals, interviews with key persons, and discussions with related management and technical departments.
The questionnaire survey was mainly carried out for the 46 administrative villages in the heritage site, and the participants were the members of the village committees. The questionnaire included information on the land use of each village, the cultivation and abandonment of terraces, the planting varieties, modes and areas of the main crops (i.e., grain crops and cash crops), the breeding varieties, the modes and quantities of the main livestock, the production, processing and sales of agricultural products, the population (including age structure and gender structure) and their employment, the economic income of each village, and the average income of the farmers, etc. A total of 46 questionnaires were sent out and all of them were recovered, which were all valid. After sorting and statistical analysis, the survey data are mainly shown in tables, to support the analysis of economic mechanism and labor employment.
We interviewed ten representative farmers in the heritage site and collected detailed information on the cropping patterns, the traditional varieties of the main crops, the key agricultural production links in a year, the traditional farming technologies such as cultivation, fertilization and irrigation, the construction and maintenance technologies of stone terraces, the traditional cultures and values, etc. The interview data and information were sorted and interpreted from the perspectives of ecological and social mechanisms. The interpretation results are shown in Section 3.1.1 and Section 3.1.2.
We also held discussions with related management and technical departments, such as the local bureaus of agriculture and rural affairs, culture and tourism, and natural resources, to understand the threats and challenges facing the SDSTS and the relevant work the local government has conducted to deal with these threats and challenges and its effectiveness. The data and information obtained from the discussions were summarized and classified. Their interpretation results, shown in Section 3.2, have supported the diagnosis of threats and challenges.
In addition to the first-hand data, we also collected a large number of secondary data, including the socio-economic statistical data of the county and related departments, the socio-economic development planning of the county and related departments, the land use map of the county and other map data, the environmental quality monitoring report of the county and other monitoring data, the county chronicles, the agriculture chronicles, and other historical documents. When we develop the conservation and management measures, we need to take into account this kind of data to ensure the feasibility of the measures to the largest extent. Additionally, we collected the literature data related to the SDSTS through literature research. The literature data is mainly used in the analysis of ecological and social mechanisms to guarantee the scientific nature of the analysis.

3. Results

3.1. Analysis of Supportive Mechanisms

3.1.1. Ecological Mechanisms

There are a set of ecological mechanisms that maintain the SDSTS at a stable state, which are mainly reflected on four levels: germplasm resources, cropping patterns, compound modes, and landscape structures. Firstly, the SDSTS is rich in agrobiodiversity with a large number of agricultural species and their local varieties. These species and varieties are highly adapted to the local natural environment with a strong resistance to drought, diseases, and stresses as well as more stable yields [47]. Secondly, the locals carry out row and relay inter-cropping to increase the per-unit surface area yield, and use crop rotation to maintain soil fertility, reduce the occurrence of pest damage, and adapt to the typical seasonal weather. Diversified cropping patterns have played an important role in maintaining the ecological balance and improving the productivity of the SDSTS. Thirdly, the locals cultivate Chinese prickly ash trees along the stone ridges, and cultivate economic trees inside the plots, which form a composite agroforestry structure with the grain and cash crops. This complex structure has not only strengthened the soil and water conservation capabilities of the terraces and improved their biodiversity, but also realized the full utilization of the land area and increased the per-unit surface area yield of the terraces. Last but not least, after the long-term land use optimization by the locals, the SDSTS has formed the landscape structure with forests and shrubs on the mountain peaks, stone terraced fields winding along the mountain, and villages and rivers/river beaches in the valleys [48].
The distinct landscape features have enabled the SDSTS with important ecological functions and to maintain ecological stability under extreme conditions (Figure 4). The forests and shrubs at the top of the mountains can reduce the soil erosion, improve the microclimate of the local regions, provide habitats for the flora and fauna, and purify the air. The stone terraced fields are able to maintain the soil and water, achieve the cycling of nutrients and other materials, provide abundant agricultural products, and protect germplasm resources [49,50]. The villages not only provide locals with a good living environment, but also play important roles in harvesting the rainfall to replenish the water supplies and intergenerational cultural transmission. The river beaches are relatively flat and provide a certain area of arable land for the local population. Seasonal river flows not only provide the local population with water during the rainy seasons, but also regulate the local microclimate through evapotranspiration.

3.1.2. Social Mechanisms

Social mechanisms that support the stable state of the SDSTS include the traditional knowledge and technology system and the traditional culture and value system. For the terraced fields, the locals have formed a series of water and soil resource utilization technologies centered upon the construction and maintenance of terraces and rainfall harvest and storage. The construction of water tanks, water cellars, wells, water pools, and reservoirs has mitigated the seasonal differences in precipitation levels and enhanced the system’s ability to deal with floods and droughts [52]. The locals have also formed a complete farming system of seed selection, tilling, sowing, fertilization, thinning, weeding, pest control, irrigation, and harvest. For example, they return straw to the land over long periods of farming and use farmyard manure to maintain soil fertility, realizing nutrient cycling utilization while preventing excess soil fertilization. Furthermore, the locals have formed their distinctive culture and value system featuring the unity of nature and man, perseverance, and cherishing soil and water. It is comprised of the food culture based on coarse grains [53], the stone building culture based on local materials [54], the folk culture closely related to agricultural production, and the unique donkey culture [55].

3.1.3. Economic Mechanisms

The SDSTS also has economic mechanisms and bears food and livelihood values. The locals make full use of the terraced fields to produce grains such as millet, maize, and beans, and cash crops such as Chinese prickly ash, black jujubes, and persimmons. These products have not only ensured the local population’s food security, but also their basic nutritional needs. The processing and branding of these products has further realized the transformation of economic values, effectively enhancing farmers’ incomes and regional development.
According to field surveys, the heritage site produced a total of 1502 t of millet, 3432 t of maize, and 500 t of soybeans in 2017. The sales ratios of millet, maize, and soybean were 80.1%, 58.1%, and 40.4%, respectively, with direct sales of CNY 4.78 million, CNY 1.2 million, and CNY 4.13 million (Table 1). The total sales of millet, maize, and soybean amounted to CNY 10.11 million, constituting an important income source for the agricultural sector in the heritage site. In 2017, the heritage site produced a total of 754 t of Chinese prickly ash, 1902 t of black jujube, and 1513 t of walnut (Table 1). More than 90% were sold, with total sales of CNY 80.94 million, among which the sales of prickly ash, black dates, and walnuts accounted for 63.2%, 8.2%, and 28.6%, respectively. It is indicated that the local farmers cultivate Chinese prickly ash, black jujube, and walnut mainly for sale, which are an important source of income for the agricultural sector in the heritage. The per capita rural income of the local people was CNY 6063 in 2017. Remittances accounted for CNY 3229, production of crops CNY 366, and production of fruits CNY 2456, equivalent to 53.3%, 6.0%, and 40.5%, respectively. It can be seen that half of the farmers’ income in the heritage site comes from terrace agriculture.

3.2. Diagnosis of Threats and Challenges

3.2.1. Threatened by Frequent Floods

She County has a typical temperate continental monsoon climate. As rainfall is concentrated in the summer, floods are frequent from July to August. She County would enter a flood period when precipitation levels are highest and storms with a precipitation greater than 50 mm appear at least once or even multiple times (Figure 5). Storms may give rise to floods or mudslides, causing damage to the stone ridge terraces around the gullies and rivers. Although the locals have creatively invented technologies to repair the collapsed or damaged stone ridges, the reconstruction of collapsed stone ridges still incurs large costs in terms of manpower and time. As a large amount of the younger population leave their villages, damaged stone ridges risk not being repaired in time, and may gradually turn into grassland or shrubland, and lose their capacity for agricultural production [48].

3.2.2. Threatened by Young Labor Outflow

In the current market economy, cultural education in rural villages is comparatively lacking, and the young are not as emotionally attached to the terraces as their elders and forefathers. In addition, relatively backward living conditions, heavy manual labor, and lower profits from agriculture compared to other trades have resulted in most youths not wishing to inherit traditional farming, and the majority choose to work in the cities or in other provinces. As the incomes from jobs outside the villages are far higher than that from terrace farming, young farmers have even less feeling for the land. Statistics showed that since 1990, the labor force structure of She County has changed prominently, i.e., the proportion of those employed in non-agricultural sectors has increased considerably, while that of the agricultural sector has seen a corresponding drop.
According to field surveys, 15,792 people left the heritage site to work outside in 2017, taking up approximately 40% of the registered population. However, it is worth mentioning that a large number of migrant workers come back to help out during the busy farming season. In 2017, the number reached 8802, accounting for 55.7% of the migrant population. Further, in the same year, a total of 18,679 people were employed in the sectors related to agricultural heritage in the heritage site, among whom 17,643 were local people, making up the bulk of the employment (94.5%) (Table 2). It shows that despite the large number of migrant workers, the sectors related to agricultural heritage, especially the production of agro-products, have greatly promoted the employment of the local labor force.

3.2.3. Threatened by Modern Agricultural Technologies

The repair and maintenance, ploughing and sowing, and harvest and processing in the heritage site is highly labor-intensive. The local farmers continue to use donkey manure and straw to make farmyard manure to solve the nutrient conversion and soil fertility problems. A large-scale exodus of young labor has caused these traditional techniques to land in the awkward situation of being “heirless”. At the same time, modern farming technologies, as represented by mini tillers, chemical fertilizers, and pesticides, and improved varieties have gradually begun to appear in the heritage site. The large-scale use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides could possibly damage the soil environment that crops depend on to grow and affect the quality and yield of such traditional products as Chinese prickly ashes and walnuts. The introduction and promotion of foreign crop varieties could likely have a large impact on the cultivation and production of local varieties. The trend of commoditization could easily cause local varieties to become extinct, along with traditional knowledge such as the breeding, cultivation, and management of local varieties.

3.2.4. Challenge to Increase Agricultural Profits

The heritage site features high mountains and steep slopes, contains more mountain land than flat land, more rock than soil, and has poor water resources. The harsh environmental conditions, coupled with highly inconvenient transport conditions and extremely intensive farming techniques, makes it difficult to increase agricultural productivity to a large extent. Statistics from 2017 showed that the average yield of autumn crops in the heritage site was lower than the average county level, and more than half of local farmers’ incomes came from non-farm work. Hence, the farmers of the heritage site fervently hope to increase agricultural productivity and agricultural income. This hope manifests itself, at a certain level, in the substitution of donkeys with mini tillers, using chemical fertilizers to replace farmyard manure, introducing high-yield crop varieties to replace local varieties, and the increased cultivation of cash crops instead of grain crops. Even though these measures can reduce labor intensity and increase agricultural income to a certain extent, they may not promote the sustainable development of the heritage site in the long term, and may even risk the conservation and inheritance of the agricultural heritage.

3.2.5. Challenge to Maintain Terraced Fields

Driven by urbanization and the farmland reforestation strategy, some stone terraced fields that were previously cultivated were abandoned, and some were converted to forest or land for construction. Landsat satellite imaging showed that the surface area of the stone terraced fields in the heritage site has continuously decreased since the 1990s, and the rate of decrease picked up significantly after 2000 [48]. According to field surveys, from 2000 to 2017, the surface area of the stone terraced fields in the heritage site was reduced by 1024 ha, among which 42.2% (approx. 503 ha) was abandoned, 53.7% (approx. 640 ha) was converted to reforested, and 4.1% (49 ha) was used for road construction and others. It can be seen that farmland reforestation is an important reason for the reduction in the area of stone terraced fields. This strategy has brought some economic benefits in the short term, and afforestation has also helped improve the local ecological environment to a certain degree. However, the rapid expansion of the forest has caused damage to the original large acreage terrace landscape. The landscape now has a higher degree of fragmentation [48]. The conversion of stone terraced fields to forests has affected the soil and water conservation capabilities of the terraces, and the amount of soil conserved in the heritage site continues to decrease [49].

3.2.6. Challenge to Improve Rural Environment

The hygiene problem in the rural environment is an important topic. However, donkeys are still raised in free-range conditions by each household in the heritage site, and their manure piles are widely scattered, making it difficult for a timely clean up. Furthermore, donkey manure will also spread into the streets, alleys, and public spaces as donkeys move around, negatively impacting the hygiene of the local environment. Another problem lies in that, as man demands better living conditions in the modern era, the original, traditional stone houses no longer satisfy the local residents’ needs for running water, electricity, natural gas, and internet, resulting in some ancient, unsophisticated, but unique stone residences to be replaced by houses of concrete and tile. At the same time, the misinterpretation of the concept of tourism has led some villages to begin to build visitors’ trails, observation decks, signboards, and visitor’s directories, and to construct buildings that are completely inconsistent with the original style of the villages. This has destroyed the traditional stone village style and features and greatly impacted the aesthetics and authenticity of the traditional villages in the heritage site.

3.3. Formulation of Conservation and Development Measures

Based on a comprehensive analysis of supportive mechanisms for the stable state of the SDSTS, and a systematic diagnosis of the threats, challenges, and their negative impacts, we proposed 34 conservation and development measures from six aspects of management mechanism construction, ecological conservation, cultural inheritance, sustainable tourism development, green and organic product development, and capacity building (Figure 6).

3.3.1. Management Mechanism Construction

The management mechanisms of the SDSTS should be constructed and improved from the following three aspects. Firstly, a management center should be established and dedicated personnel should be provided to be in charge of the conservation, development, and capability building of the SDSTS. Secondly, the measures on the conservation and development of the SDSTS should be improved, especially in the aspects of the reclamation of terraces, the repair of stone ridges, the construction of irrigation facilities, the conservation of traditional germplasm resources, subsidies for traditional farming methods, and the improvement of the village environment. Finally, a special fund should be set up to ensure the implementation of the conservation and development measures of the SDSTS.

3.3.2. Ecological Conservation

Seven measures are proposed to reinforce the ecological conservation from the following two aspects. In terms of strengthening government management, it is suggested that detailed rules are enacted for the reclamation and repair of the terraces and reclamation and repair plans are formulated according to the conditions. Red lines should be drawn for the protection of village features, so as to reduce the damage to village features caused by the construction of tourism facilities. The planting area of high-water consumption tree species should be strictly controlled; instead, low-water consumption tree species should be planted as far as possible when terraces are reforested, and economic tree species should not be planted over large areas just to develop the rural tourism industry. The agricultural irrigation facilities should be improved to realize the seasonal regulation of water resources and guarding against droughts and floods. The rural environment should also be improved, such as cleaning donkey manure and removing living garbage. In terms of promoting farmers’ participation, it is suggested that detailed rules are issued for subsidizing traditional farming technologies, such as continuing to raise donkeys, cultivating traditional crop varieties, repairing stone ridges, and reclaiming terraces. The investigation and collection of traditional varieties should be carried out to establish a germplasm resource bank following the international standards used in seed banks and fully incorporating the capabilities of the local farmers.

3.3.3. Cultural Inheritance

Six measures are proposed to promote the exploration, conservation, and inheritance of the traditional farming culture in the SDSTS. Specific measures are as follows: first, digging deep into the traditional farming culture, and gradually restoring valuable folk activities and organizing cultural activities to ensure the continuity of traditional farming culture; second, certifying the inheritors of traditional cultures and subsidizing the inheritors to support them in launching related cultural inheritance activities every year; third, establishing a volunteer team mainly comprised of students and farmers and promoting residents to participate in heritage conservation; fourth, publicizing the SDSTS through publicity handbooks, publicity films, audio-visual materials, photography, writing, painting and recitation competitions, feature stories in the media, etc.; fifth, compiling popular science publications for different groups and publicizing heritage knowledge through them; sixth, establishing a thematic museum about the SDSTS, and making it a window for people to know the heritage system.

3.3.4. Green and Organic Product Development

The development of green and organic products has been regarded as a good way forward for the sustainable development of heritage sites [56,57]. Five development measures are proposed to promote the development of green and organic products in the SDSTS. Firstly, technical standards for the production of green and organic products should be enacted or updated, guiding the production of green and organic products. Secondly, demonstration bases for the production of green and organic products should be established and technical training should be provided for farmers and cooperatives to promote the production of green and organic products. Thirdly, we should expand the certification scale of green and organic products, increase the quantity of certified green and organic products, and expand the certified area of green and organic products. Fourthly, a public brand should be established for the agricultural products from the SDSTS, measures on the use of the public brand should be enacted, and strict supervision and management should be provided for the agricultural products using the public brand. Finally, we should intensify efforts to promote and sell agricultural products, establish offline sales networks and online sales platforms, as well as link the online platforms with major e-commerce platforms.

3.3.5. Sustainable Tourism Development

Reasonable tourism development is beneficial to the conservation of IAHS on a larger scale, and is a good way for the development of the heritage sites in the new era [58]. Therefore, we suggest that the overall design should be combined with specific measures and put forward seven development measures. In terms of the overall design, a plan for sustainable tourism development should be made to clarify the principles, directions, and paths of the tourism development suitable for the SDSTS. In terms of concrete measures, it is supposed to establish an information center about the SDSTS, displaying and publicizing the features of the SDSTS through multiple media; to compile tourism interpretation booklets for the SDSTS aimed at different audiences to introduce the sustainable tourism activities; and to cooperate with middle and high schools to organize study trips to the SDSTS. In addition, some tourism-supporting industries can be developed, such as constructing agricultural heritage theme lodgings and restaurants relying on which the inheriting activities of traditional food culture can be carried out. Tourist souvenirs should also be developed and can be put into these thematic restaurants and lodgings.

3.3.6. Capacity Building

Six measures are proposed to enhance the capacity building of the managers and producers in the SDSTS. In terms of management ability, it is supposed to provide training for the residents to increase their skills in green and organic production, sustainable tourism development, cultural publicity, and inheritance. The managers should actively participate in domestic and international academic conferences, working meetings, and exchange activities, and regularly invite experts to come and provide guidance for heritage conservation. Several information platforms should be designed and operated for the SDSTS, integrating the introduction of heritage features, the creation of tourism resources and tourist routes, and the sales of featured agricultural products, cultural, and creative products. Other measures include designing a visual identity system for the SDSTS and formulating the detailed regulations for its use, jointly establishing a research platform for the conservation and utilization of the SDSTS with research institutions, and promoting collaborative research between research teams from different fields. In terms of cultural awareness, it is suggested to build a community-based association, mobilizing forces from all over society to participate in the conservation and development of the SDSTS.

4. Discussion

4.1. Combining Heritage Conservation with Regional Development

Experiences from World Cultural Heritage indicate that the main objective of heritage management must be to improve people’s quality of life and social interaction [59] and good management may have mid- and long-term socio-cultural and economic impacts [60]. Thus, heritage management is now broadening the scope from conserving the heritage in isolation to integrating heritage resources into sustainable rural and urban development [60,61]. On the contrary, unsuitable management will result in the destruction of the heritage. For example, the Ifugao terraced landscape in the Philippines was destroyed due to unsustainable tourism development [62]. It is also true for IAHS. People increasingly recognize that effective conservation and development plays a very important role in maintaining the sustainability of IAHS, as their vulnerability will make many processes irreversible, and once damaged, it will inevitably lead to the loss of their functions and values [22]. Moreover, as IAHS are living systems, their conservation must be conducted in a dynamic way so that local farmers can benefit from heritage conservation while the heritage site can seek sustainable development [8,12].
The DPSIR model is a problem structuring approach that is widely used in environmental management. It allows the cause–effect relationships between anthropogenic activities and their environmental and socio-economic impacts to be explored and described in a sequential manner, which is in line with the characteristics of IAHS and their conservation. The DPSIR-based analytical framework provides an effective way to fully understand the social and ecological background of heritage sites and analyze the threats and challenges faced by IAHS in depth. Using this framework, managers can formulate effective IAHS conservation and development measures that are consistent with local social and ecological conditions, and can be constantly adjusted with the changing pressures, so as to maximize the IAHS conservation effectiveness while promoting regional economic development. When this framework is applied to the SDSTS, thirty-four conservation and development measures from six aspects have been proposed, among which seven measures of ecological conservation and six measures of cultural inheritance are conservation approaches in the traditional sense. However, five measures of organic product development and seven measures of sustainable tourism development are all dynamic conservation approaches that will enable local farmers to benefit from the SDSTS conservation as well as promote the economic development of the heritage site.

4.2. Multi-Stakeholder Process as One of the Most Important Safeguard Measures

To ensure the effective implementation of the conservation and development measures, a multi-stakeholder process must be established. It has been proved that the engagement of stakeholders is of great importance for heritage planning and management [63,64]. The multi-stakeholders in the conservation and development of IAHS involve governments of different levels, muti-disciplinary scientists, communities and farmers, and business enterprises as well as social organizations [12]. Plus, some scholars emphasized that citizens play an important role in IAHS conservation and development [65]. After over ten years of trial and improvement, a “Five-in-One” multi-stakeholder process has been gradually established in China, which is led by governments, promoted by scientists, and driven by enterprises with active participation of communities and farmers and cooperation from citizens and social organizations [12].
When it comes to the SDSTS, firstly, the management center to be established is responsible for the heritage conservation and development, and serves as the main government body in charge of communication and collaboration with MARA, the Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, and other county government departments. Secondly, the conservation and utilization association for the SDSTS should be established on the county level on the basis of the village-level association that was established in Wangjinzhuang Village in 2018, to mobilize the forces of multiple stakeholders, especially the business and community sectors, to participate in the conservation and development of the SDSTS. Thirdly, relying on the association, a volunteer team with members mainly drawn from the community should be organized and it should fully engage women, the elders, and students in the heritage site to incorporate the conservation of agricultural heritage into the community’s daily life and curricula of local schools. Finally, the mechanisms to train communities and empower their participation should be explored, such as utilizing exchange and collaborative platforms for heritage conservation, inviting experts to guide the conservation and utilization of the SDSTS, and inviting journalists to cover the conservation effects of the SDSTS.

4.3. Monitoring and Evaluation to Guarantee the Implementation Effectiveness

IAHS are complex adaptive systems that are multi-dimensional, across time and space, and multi-functional. They are composed of ecological and social subsystems that are inter-dependent in various ways and affect each other to some degree [9]. The interaction of subsystems has formed a set of effective mechanisms that can maintain the sustainability of the heritage system. Besides interacting with each other, the subsystems are also influenced by external forces, and the influences are ultimately manifested as changes in the structure, function, and state of the IAHS. The extent to which subsystems affect each other also depends on the size of the pressure brought by external forces [10]. When faced with internal or external interference or disturbance, IAHS will finally reach a new equilibrium state through the self-regulation of each subsystem, which is called adaptation [10]. Therefore, an important criterion for measuring the effectiveness of the measures is whether the internal mechanisms have been strengthened to ensure that IAHS reach a stable state and are resilient to external interference. This requires the managers to monitor the conservation and development measures and their impacts on the internal mechanisms of IAHS, and evaluate the effectiveness of IAHS conservation and development in order to make timely adjustments.
To ensure the effective implementation of the measures, a monitoring system should be established for the SDSTS under the guidance of MARA. The system should systematically monitor the mechanisms and functions of the ecological conservation, economic development, social maintenance, and cultural inheritance of the SDSTS, and meticulously and continuously record how measures are implemented such as institutional construction, publicity, demonstration, and promotion. Relevant statistics and survey data should be obtained through surveys of households and sectors as well as field investigations, and be submitted to MARA and the provincial department in forms of annual reports and survey reports. To promote the SDSTS conservation and development, the heritage site should also make a regular evaluation on the effectiveness of the implementation of the measures and complete a self-evaluation report. The self-evaluation report should sum up the relevant work conducted for each measure and evaluate its effectiveness qualitatively and quantitatively. The report should also summarize the experiences of some measures that were completed on or ahead of time, and analyze factors that caused some measures to fail or be delayed. The results from the report will be used to strengthen or adjust relevant measures in the future. On the basis of the self-evaluation, the heritage site should actively cooperate with the inspection by MARA, proactively solicit opinions and proposals from experts, promoting the optimal adjustment and implementation of the measures.

4.4. Strengths, Potentials, and Limitations of the DPSIR-Based Analytical Framework

It is demonstrated that the DPSIR-based analytical framework can guide the formulation of IAHS conservation and development measures with flexibility and feasibility, thus having the potential to become a general tool for IAHS conservation and development. The flexibility is reflected in that the framework is not limited to a specific set of conservation and development measures, but provides a theoretical method for the formulation of such measures. The feasibility is reflected in the successful application of the framework in the SDSTS. This means that any heritage site can formulate its own measures according to the heritage functions and values and in response to the threats and challenges. This framework also provides a technical reference for other types of heritages when it comes to the formulation of conservation and development measures. The application of this framework in the SDSTS can be considered as inspirational for the use in IAHS of other countries. However, it should be noted that its application must be based on a large amount of field investigation and data collection. Only by fully understanding the characteristics and values of the heritage and the threats and challenges it faces can we make appropriate measures for its conservation and development with the DPSIR-based analytical framework. Although its application to the SDSTS worked very well, the validation of this framework needs more practical studies concerning IAHS and other types of heritages. Therefore, it is expected that more case studies will emerge in the coming future. Last but not least, the DPSIR model is not the only model suitable for IAHS conservation. Explorations on other models to support the formulation of IAHS conservation and development measures are of great significance and represent the research directions in the future.

5. Conclusions

Under the influence of modernization and other driving forces, IAHS are facing such challenges as an exodus of the labor force, changes in land use and production mode, and difficulty in traditional culture inheritance, showing significant vulnerability. It is increasingly recognized that scientific conservation and development plays an important role in maintaining the sustainability of IAHS. The “living” nature of IAHS determines that their conservation must rely on the formulation of dynamic conservation approaches and adaptive management strategies according to their characteristics. In this study, we established a DPSIR-based analytical framework and applied it to the SDSTS, a China-NIAHS, and a GIAHS. With this framework, we analyzed the supportive mechanisms for the stable state of the SDSTS, diagnosed the threats and challenges it faces, and formulated conservation and development measures accordingly. The application results demonstrated that the DPSIR-based analytical framework has high flexibility and feasibility and can provide technical support for IAHS conservation and development, thus having the potential to become a general tool for the dynamic conservation and sustainable development of IAHS.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.J.; methodology, W.J.; formal analysis, W.J. and Z.Y.; investigation, W.J., Y.S. and Y.L.; writing—original draft preparation, W.J. and Z.Y.; writing—review and editing, W.J., Y.S. and Y.L.; visualization, W.J., Y.S. and Y.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 41971264 and 41801204), and the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of Chinese Academy of Sciences (2019056).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Qingwen Min and Xianlin He for their support for the field surveys, and thank Tiancai Zhou, Rongjuan Yang, and Xiao Yang for their help in information collection and figure drawing.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Keeble, B.R. The Brundtland report: ‘Our common future’. Med. War 1988, 4, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Pimentel, D.; Acquay, H.; Biltonen, M.; Rice, P.; Silva, M.; Nelson, J.; Lipner, V.; Giordano, S.; Horowitz, A.; D’amore, M. Environmental and economic costs of pesticide use. BioScience 1992, 42, 750–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Tilman, D.; Cassman, K.G.; Matson, P.A.; Naylor, R.; Polasky, S. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 2002, 418, 671–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Hedlund, J.; Longo, S.B.; York, R. Agriculture, pesticide use, and economic development: A global examination (1990–2014). Rural. Sociol. 2020, 85, 519–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Li, W. Agri-cultural Heritage Research and Conservation Practices: Progress and Perspectives. J. Agro-Environ. Sci. 2015, 34, 1–6. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  6. Plahe, J.; Wright, S.; Marembo, M. Livelihoods crises in Vidarbha, India: Food sovereignty through traditional farming systems as a possible solution. South Asia J. South Asian Stud. 2017, 40, 600–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Min, Q. GIAHS: A New Kind of World Heritage. Resour. Sci. 2006, 28, 206–208. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  8. Koohafkan, P.; dela Cruz, M.J. Conservation and adaptive management of globally important agricultural heritage systems (GIAHS). J. Resour. Ecol. 2011, 2, 22–28. [Google Scholar]
  9. Fuller, T.; Min, Q. Understanding agricultural heritage sites as complex adaptive systems: The challenge of complexity. J. Resour. Sci. 2013, 4, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fuller, A.M.; Min, Q.; Jiao, W.; Bai, Y. Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) of China: The challenge of complexity in research. Ecosyst. Health Sust. 2015, 1, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jiao, W.; Fuller, A.M.; Xu, S.; Min, Q.; Wu, M. Socio-ecological adaptation of agricultural heritage systems in modern China: Three cases in Qingtian County, Zhejiang Province. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Min, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Jiao, W.; Sun, X. Responding to common questions on the conservation of agricultural heritage systems in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2016, 26, 969–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Xie, J.; Hu, L.; Tang, J.; Wu, X.; Li, N.; Yuan, Y.; Yang, H.; Zhang, J.; Luo, S.; Chen, X. Ecological mechanisms underlying the sustainability of the agricultural heritage rice–fish coculture system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, E1381–E1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Zhang, Y.; Min, Q.; Li, H.; He, L.; Zhang, C.; Yang, L. A conservation approach of globally important agricultural heritage systems (GIAHS): Improving traditional agricultural patterns and promoting scale-production. Sustainability 2017, 9, 295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. He, X.; Sun, Y.; Gao, D.; Wei, F.; Pan, L.; Guo, C.; Mao, R.; Xie, Y.; Li, C.; Zhu, Y. Comparison of agronomic traits between rice landraces and modern varieties at different altitudes in the paddy fields of Yuanyang terrace, Yunnan province. J. Resour. Ecol. 2011, 2, 46–50. [Google Scholar]
  16. Park, H.C.; Oh, C.H. Flora, life form characteristics, and plan for the promotion of biodiversity in South Korea’s Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System, the traditional Gudeuljang irrigated rice terraces in Cheongsando. J. Mt. Sci. 2017, 14, 1212–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sun, Y.; Zhou, H.; Zhang, L.; Min, Q.; Yin, W. Adapting to droughts in Yuanyang Terrace of SW China: Insight from disaster risk reduction. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2013, 18, 759–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Qiu, Z.; Chen, B.; Nakamura, K. Customary Management System of Irrigation ponds in Japan-a Case Study in a Glob-ally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) site of Noto Island, Ishikawa Prefecture. J. Resour. Ecol. 2016, 7, 205–210. [Google Scholar]
  19. Yuan, Z.; Min, Q.; Cheng, S. The smallholder economy for the Hani rice terraces sustaining millennium. J. China Agric. Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2013, 30, 133–140. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  20. Kajihara, H.; Zhang, S.; You, W.; Min, Q. Concerns and opportunities around cultural heritage in east Asian Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS). Sustainability 2018, 10, 1235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Food and Agriculture Organization. Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems: Combining Agricultural Biodiversity, Resilient Ecosystems, Traditional Farming Practices and Cultural Identity; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2018; Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i9187en/I9187EN.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2022).
  22. Reyes, S.R.C.; Miyazaki, A.; Yiu, E.; Saito, O. Enhancing sustainability in traditional agriculture: Indicators for monitoring the conservation of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in Japan. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bai, Y.; Sun, X.; Tian, M.; Fuller, A.M. Typical water-land utilization GIAHS in low-lying areas: The Xinghua duotian agrosystem example in China. J. Resour. Ecol. 2014, 5, 320–327. [Google Scholar]
  24. Nahuelhual, L.; Carmona, A.; Laterra, P.; Barrena, J.; Aguayo, M. A mapping approach to assess intangible cultural ecosystem services: The case of agriculture heritage in Southern Chile. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 40, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ma, N.; He, S.; Min, Q. Edible Biological Resource Use in an Agricultural Heritage System and Its Driving Forces: A Case of the Shuangjiang Mengku Ancient Tea and Culture System. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yuan, Z.; Lun, F.; He, L.; Cao, Z.; Min, Q.; Bai, Y.; Liu, M.; Cheng, S.; Li, W.; Fuller, A.M. Exploring the state of retention of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in a Hani rice terrace village, Southwest China. Sustainability 2014, 6, 4497–4513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Zhang, Y.; Li, X.; Min, Q. Transportation accessibility of central towns in Important Agricultural Heritage Systems sites in mountainous areas and its impact on local economic development: A case study of Honghe Hani Rice Terraced System, Yunnan. J. Resour. Ecol. 2019, 10, 29–38. [Google Scholar]
  28. Borja, A.; Galparsoro, I.; Solaun, O.; Muxika, I.; Tello, E.M.; Uriarte, A.; Valencia, V. The European Water Framework Directive and the DPSIR, a methodological approach to assess the risk of failing to achieve good ecological status. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2006, 66, 84–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Atkins, J.P.; Burdon, D.; Elliott, M.; Gregory, A.J. Management of the marine environment: Integrating ecosystem services and societal benefits with the DPSIR framework in a systems approach. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62, 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tscherning, K.; Helming, K.; Krippner, B.; Sieber, S.; y Paloma, S.G. Does research applying the DPSIR framework support decision making? Land Use Policy 2012, 29, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gari, S.R.; Newton, A.; Icely, J.D. A review of the application and evolution of the DPSIR framework with an emphasis on coastal social-ecological systems. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2015, 103, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Zhao, R.; Fang, C.; Liu, H.; Liu, X. Evaluating urban ecosystem resilience using the DPSIR framework and the ENA model: A case study of 35 cities in China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 72, 102997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Delbaere, B. An Inventory of Biodiversity Indicators in Europe; European Environmental Agency Technical Report; European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2002; No. 92; p. 42. [Google Scholar]
  34. European Environment Agency (EEA). Halting the Loss of Biodiversity by 2010: Proposal for a First Set of Indicators to Monitor Progress in Europe; EEA Technical Report; European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2007; Volume 11, p. 186. [Google Scholar]
  35. Yee, S.H.; Carriger, J.F.; Bradley, P.; Fisher, W.S.; Dyson, B. Developing scientific information to support decisions for sustainable coral reef ecosystem services. Ecol. Econom. 2015, 115, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lu, W.; Xu, C.; Wu, J.; Cheng, S. Ecological effect assessment based on the DPSIR model of a polluted urban river during restoration: A case study of the Nanfei river, China. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 96, 146–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kohsaka, R. Developing biodiversity indicators for cities: Applying the DPSIR model to Nagoya and integrating social and ecological aspects. Ecol. Res. 2010, 25, 925–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Liu, Y.; Song, W.; Deng, X. Understanding the spatiotemporal variation of urban land expansion in oasis cities by integrating remote sensing and multi-dimensional DPSIR-based indicators. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 96, 23–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Qu, S.; Hu, S.; Li, W.; Wang, H.; Zhang, C.; Li, Q. Interaction between urban land expansion and land use policy: An analysis using the DPSIR framework. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 104856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mosaffaie, J.; Jam, A.S.; Tabatabaei, M.R.; Kousari, M.R. Trend assessment of the watershed health based on DPSIR framework. Land Use Policy 2021, 100, 104911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Liu, D.; Tang, R.; Xie, J.; Tian, J.; Shi, R.; Zhang, K. Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China. Ecosyst. Serv. 2020, 41, 101054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ahmed, A.; Mahmud, H.; Sohel, M.S.I. DPSIR framework to analyze anthropogenic factors influence on provisioning and cultural ecosystem services of Sundarbans East Reserve Forest, Bangladesh. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 2021, 48, 102042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Turner, R.K.; Schaafsma, M.; Mee, L.; Elliot, M.; Burdon, D.; Atkins, J.P.; Jickells, T. Conceptual framework. In Coastal Zone Ecosystem Services; Turner, R.K., Schaafsma, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 11–40. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wan, S.; Radhakrishnan, M.; Zevenbergen, C.; Pathirana, A. Capturing the changing dynamics between governmental actions across plausible future scenarios in urban water systems. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 62, 102318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Delgado, L.E.; Zúñiga, C.C.; Asún, R.A.; Castro-Díaz, R.; Natenzon, C.E.; Paredes, L.D.; Pérez-Orellana, D.; Quiñones, D.; Sepúlveda, H.H.; Rojas, P.M. Toward social-ecological coastal zone governance of Chiloé Island (Chile) based on the DPSIR framework. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 758, 143999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Jiao, W.; Cui, W.; Min, Q.; Zhang, Y. A review of research on agricultural heritage systems and their conservation. Resour. Sci. 2021, 43, 823–837. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  47. He, X.; Wang, H.; Liu, G.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Jia, H.; Wang, L. Protection and utilization of agricultural species diversity and genetic diversity in Shexian Dryland Terrace System. Chin. J. Eco-Agric. 2020, 28, 1453–1464. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  48. Yang, R.; Liu, Y.; Min, Q.; Liu, R.; Jiao, W.; Liu, M.; Li, H.; He, X. Landscape characteristics and evolution of agricultural heritage of dryland stone-ridge terraced field in Shexian, Hebei province. China Agric. Inform. 2019, 31, 61–73. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  49. Yu, T. Study on Soil Erosion and Soil Element Characteristics of Dryland Terraced Fields in She Xian County. Master’s Thesis, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China, 2018. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  50. Mi, Q.; Zhan, T.; He, K.; Sun, J.; Luo, L. Soil and Water Conservation Capacity of Stone-dam Terrace Rocky Mountain Areas in Northern China Supported by RUSLE. Mt. Res. 2019, 37, 828–838. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  51. FAO. GIAHS Proposal of Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/cc0704en/cc0704en.pdf (accessed on 31 October 2022).
  52. Jiang, P. Thirsty Terrace: Distribution and Management of Water Resource in Wangjinzhuang Village. J. China Agric. Univ. Soc. Sci. Ed. 2017, 34, 95–102. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  53. Sun, Q. The Ecological Attribute of Agricultural Culture and the Cultural Pattern of Rural Society. Agric. Archaeol. 2009, 04, 110–116+127. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  54. He, X. The Origins, Classifications and Features of Dry Land Terrace Farming System of Shexian County, Hebei Province. J. China Agric. Univ. Soc. Sci. Ed. 2017, 34, 84–94. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  55. Li, H. Farming and Living: The Donkey Culture of the Dryland Terrace Agriculture System. J. China Agric. Univ. Soc. Sci. Ed. 2017, 34, 103–110. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhang, Y.; Liu, M.; Min, Q.; Yuan, Z.; Li, J.; Fan, M. Calculation of price compensation of agriculture products in the period of organic conversion in agricultural heritage sites–taking paddy rice of Hani terrace in Honghe County of Yunnan province as an example. J. Nat. Resour. 2015, 30, 374–383. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  57. Kohsaka, R.; Matsuoka, H. Analysis of Japanese municipalities with Geopark, MAB, and GIAHS certification: Quantitative approach to official records with text-mining methods. SAGE Open 2015, 5, 2158244015617517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Sun, Y.; Timothy, D.; Wang, Y.; Min, Q.; Sun, Y.Y. Reflections on agricultural heritage systems and tourism in China. J. China Tour. Res. 2019, 15, 359–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Provenzano, V.; Arnone, M.; Seminara, M.R. Innovation in the rural areas and the linkage with the Quintuple Helix Model. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 223, 442–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Quintana, D.C.; Díaz-Puente, J.M.; Gallego-Moreno, F. Architectural and cultural heritage as a driver of social change in rural areas: 10 years (2009–2019) of management and recovery in Huete, a town of Cuenca, Spain. Land Use Policy 2022, 115, 106017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Rey-Perez, J.; Ávila, M.E.S. Historic urban landscape: An approach for sustainable management in Cuenca (Ecuador). J. Cult. Heritage Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 7, 308–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Bantayan, N.C.; Calderon, M.M.; Dizon, J.T.; Sajise, A.J.U.; Salvador, M.G. Estimating the extent and damage of the UNESCO World heritage sites of the Ifugao. J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 2012, 15, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  63. Liu, Y.; Jin, X.; Dupre, K. Engaging stakeholders in contested urban heritage planning and management. Cities 2022, 122, 103521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Li, J.; Krishnamurthy, S.; Roders, A.P.; van Wesemael, P. Imagine the Old Town of Lijiang: Contextualising community participation for urban heritage management in China. Habitat Int. 2021, 108, 102321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kohsaka, R.; Matsuoka, H.; Uchiyama, Y.; Rogel, M. Regional management and biodiversity conservation in GIAHS: Text analysis of municipal strategy and tourism management. Ecosyst. Health Sust. 2019, 5, 124–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Sustainability 15 04439 g001 550
Figure 1. The DPSIR-based analytical framework for IAHS conservation and development measure formulation.
Figure 1. The DPSIR-based analytical framework for IAHS conservation and development measure formulation.
Sustainability 15 04439 g001
Sustainability 15 04439 g002 550
Figure 2. Location of the heritage site.
Figure 2. Location of the heritage site.
Sustainability 15 04439 g002
Sustainability 15 04439 g003 550
Figure 3. A photo of the SDSTS. Note: The photo was provided by the Shexian Agriculture and Rural Affairs Bureau in 2018.
Figure 3. A photo of the SDSTS. Note: The photo was provided by the Shexian Agriculture and Rural Affairs Bureau in 2018.
Sustainability 15 04439 g003
Sustainability 15 04439 g004 550
Figure 4. Spatial structure and important functions of the SDSTS. Note: The figure was drawn by the authors and used in the GIAHS proposal of the SDSTS [51] as scientific support.
Figure 4. Spatial structure and important functions of the SDSTS. Note: The figure was drawn by the authors and used in the GIAHS proposal of the SDSTS [51] as scientific support.
Sustainability 15 04439 g004
Sustainability 15 04439 g005 550
Figure 5. Changes in precipitation levels and storm frequency of She County since 1990. Note: The figure was drawn by the authors and used in the GIAHS proposal of the SDSTS [51] as scientific support.
Figure 5. Changes in precipitation levels and storm frequency of She County since 1990. Note: The figure was drawn by the authors and used in the GIAHS proposal of the SDSTS [51] as scientific support.
Sustainability 15 04439 g005
Sustainability 15 04439 g006 550
Figure 6. Conservation and development measures in response to the threats and challenges.
Figure 6. Conservation and development measures in response to the threats and challenges.
Sustainability 15 04439 g006
Table
Table 1. Production and direct sales of important crops in the SDSTS in 2017.
Table 1. Production and direct sales of important crops in the SDSTS in 2017.
CategoryYield (Tonne)Sale Ratio (%)Sales (CNY)
Grain cropMillet150240.44,130,000
Maize343280.14,780,000
Soybean50058.11,200,000
Fruit cropChinese prickly ash75496.651,160,000
Black jujube19,01296.76,660,000
Walnut151390.923,120,000
Table
Table 2. Labor employed in sectors related to agricultural heritage in 2017.
Table 2. Labor employed in sectors related to agricultural heritage in 2017.
SectorTotal EmploymentLocal Farmers
Total<45 Years of AgeFemale
Production of agro-products17,75616,75459916575
Processing and sales of agro-products676676305305
Tourism service4410105
Inheritance of traditional culture *4402
Other sectors199199990
In total18,67917,64364056887
* Inheritance of traditional culture refers to religious and cultural activities closely related to agricultural heritage, such as traditional rituals (hosts), traditional religions (leaders), and intangible cultural heritage (inheritors).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jiao, W.; Yu, Z.; Sun, Y.; Liu, Y. An Analytical Framework for Formulating Conservation and Development Measures for Important Agricultural Heritage Systems. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4439. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054439

AMA Style

Jiao W, Yu Z, Sun Y, Liu Y. An Analytical Framework for Formulating Conservation and Development Measures for Important Agricultural Heritage Systems. Sustainability. 2023; 15(5):4439. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054439

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jiao, Wenjun, Zhounan Yu, Yehong Sun, and Yang Liu. 2023. "An Analytical Framework for Formulating Conservation and Development Measures for Important Agricultural Heritage Systems" Sustainability 15, no. 5: 4439. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054439

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop